| From: | "Tim Jones" <TJones(at)optio(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: joining two tables slow due to sequential scan | 
| Date: | 2006-02-10 22:59:03 | 
| Message-ID: | 47668A1334CDBF46927C1A0DFEB223D3131324@mail.optiosoftware.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance | 
ok here is real db
the first  query I had seems to make no sense because it is only fast if
I limit the rows since almost all rows have status = 'AC'
second query
 tables both have about 10 million rows and it takes a long time as you
can see but this person only has approx 160 total documents
 QUERY PLAN      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hash Join  (cost=84813.14..1510711.97 rows=48387 width=555) (actual
time=83266.854..91166.315 rows=3 loops=1)
   Hash Cond: ("outer".documentidentifier =
"inner".dssdocumentidentifier)
   ->  Seq Scan on documentversions  (cost=0.00..269141.98 rows=9677398
width=415) (actual time=0.056..49812.459 rows=9677398 loops=1)
   ->  Hash  (cost=83660.05..83660.05 rows=48036 width=140) (actual
time=10.833..10.833 rows=3 loops=1)
         ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on clinicaldocuments
(cost=301.13..83660.05 rows=48036 width=140) (actual time=0.243..0.258
rows=3 loops=1)
               Recheck Cond: (patientidentifier = 690193)
               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on ix_cdocpid  (cost=0.00..301.13
rows=48036 width=0) (actual time=0.201..0.201 rows=3 loops=1)
                     Index Cond: (patientidentifier = 690193)
 Total runtime: 91166.540 ms
Tim Jones
Healthcare Project Manager
Optio Software, Inc.
(770) 576-3555
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us] 
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 5:52 PM
To: Tim Jones
Cc: Scott Marlowe; Dave Dutcher; pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] joining two tables slow due to sequential scan 
"Tim Jones" <TJones(at)optio(dot)com> writes:
> QUERY PLAN
> 'Hash Join  (cost=899.83..4384.17 rows=482 width=1350) (actual
> time=0.203..0.203 rows=0 loops=1)'
> ...
> 'Total runtime: 0.392 ms'
Hardly seems like evidence of a performance problem ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Dutcher | 2006-02-10 23:25:20 | Re: joining two tables slow due to sequential scan | 
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-02-10 22:51:50 | Re: joining two tables slow due to sequential scan |